Wong chooses politics over community
Openly gay federal climate change minister Penny Wong has ignited a storm of criticism following a declaration of support for her Government’s stand against gay marriage.
Wong put her stance to the public twice in three days — first on Channel 10 on Saturday, and again on the ABC on Monday night.
On Ten, the South Australian senator said she respected Labor’s view of marriage as an institution between a man and a woman.
“I think the reality is there is a cultural, religious, historical view around that which we have to respect,” she said.
Wong, who is not up for re-election on August 21, confirmed that position on ABC’s Q&A program.
“I accept that you and others in the community would like us to have a different position in terms of marriage. That isn’t the position of the party,” she said.
“I have a view — you join a team, you’re part of a team and that’s the way we operate. People sometimes like that and sometimes they don’t.”
Wong also appeared to shoot down the possibility of a conscience vote on the issue in the next parliament, saying, “I don’t believe in conscience votes”.
Defending Wong on Q&A, former Labor senator Graham Richardson said support for the issue within the ALP was far from widespread.
“There are a lot of people in the Labor Party who don’t agree with this stuff — at the moment there’s nowhere near a majority,” the party power broker said.
“She doesn’t run the government. She’s a part of it. There’s a thing called cabinet solidarity and if she wants to break it she gets nowhere.”
[poll id=”37″]
Australian Marriage Equality spokesman Alex Greenwich said Wong’s rationale for opposing marriage equality was deeply hypocritical.
“If culture, religion and history were sound reasons for upholding discrimination there would be no Senator Penny Wong,” he said.
Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young told Sydney Star Observer Wong’s comments had shown up a supposedly forward moving party.
“What happened to the party that wanted to move forward?” they gay marriage advocate asked.
“What we’re seeing from Penny Wong is anything but that.”
Community Action Against Homophobia (CAAH) co-convener Cat Rose said Wong’s stance put her to the extreme right wing of the LGBTI community.
“It’s a shame Labor thinks they can wheel out a lesbian politician to defend their homophobic position,” Rose said.
“The polls show the LGBTI community wants marriage equality — someone like Penny Wong shouldn’t be allowed to speak for us.”
Neighbour Day founder Andrew Heslop used Facebook to express his outrage and disappointment at Wong’s comments.
“Across Australia there are thousands and thousands of parents in the city and the bush with same-sex attracted children,” he wrote.
“These families are currently being denied the opportunity to see all of their adult children lovingly commit to their chosen partner in a nationally and equally legally valid ceremony.
“It may be true that Senator Wong is not interested in such a ceremony with her female partner … but at least she should be given a choice.”
Wong has twice been voted on to the SameSame 25 Most Influential Gays and Lesbians list and has previously offered dinner with herself as a prize at the annual Aurora Dinner.
Multiple calls to her office by Sydney Star Observer this week were not returned.
Wong’s comments attracted a flurry of activity online with nearly 70 percent of 40,000 people stating their support for same-sex marriage on a Sydney Morning Herald poll, and four out of five Sydney Star Observer readers saying they would not vote Labor as a result of Wong’s comments.
CAAH will hold a protest against the Government’s anti-gay marriage stance at Taylor Square at 5pm this Thursday.
info: The next Sydney gay marriage protest is at Sydney Town Hall from 1pm on Saturday, August 14.
Previous story: Wong labelled a hypocrite
To Baz, I say Penny and Julia have every right not to support gay marriage but they should do so on solid grounds. Merely opposing it because they happen to be members of a party is what is truly shallow. Wong and Gillard are ‘unconventional’ women – at least when it suits them. I imagine the Australian electorate has given its verdict on a party that represents no one but the selfish interests of its members. Federal Labour is a joke and the sooner gay men and lesbians realise this the better it is for all of us. I would sooner vote for an honest conservative politician than one who appeals to the gay and lesbian community when it suits him or her.
Same old Labor.
VOTE 1 GREENS PEOPLE!!!
She’s a hyprocritical bitch!
“Jim Wallace at the Australian Christian Lobby has spoken about the Internet Filter blocking Same-Sex Marriage websites.”
Yep- that would fall under the “illegal or unwanted content” category.
“lies put out by Penny Wong, Labor, and Christian Groups about the history of Same-Sex (Marriage)”
Yep- she needs to have a look back at Chinese history of same sex marriage before homophobia was invented by Chrisitians 2,000 years ago & spread by Christian Missionaries & international European Imperial trade & industrial control to all countries on the planet.
Only in very recent History have people from our community been excluded from Same-Sex Marriage. In the ACT Federal Labor fought to have any Marriage like ceremony excluded from Civil Union legislation. This was absurd.
Various types of same-sex marriages have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.
In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies. Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.
An example of egalitarian male domestic partnership from the early Zhou Dynasty period of China is recorded in the story of Pan Zhang & Wang Zhongxian. While the relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.
The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire. For instance, Emperor Nero is said to have married one of his males slaves. Emperor Elagabalus married a Carian slave named Hierocles. While there is a consensus among modern historians that same-sex relationships existed in ancient Rome, the exact frequency and nature of same-sex unions during that period has been obscured.In 342 AD Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans issued a law in the Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) prohibiting same-sex marriage in Rome and ordering execution for those so married.
There has been a lot of lies put out by Penny Wong, Labor, and Christian Groups about the history of Same-Sex. If we are to use history as a guide, and the many cultures that had Same-Sex Marriage, then we should be talking about bringing back Same-Sex Marriage.
Jim Wallace at the Australian Christian Lobby has spoken about the Internet Filter blocking Same-Sex Marriage websites. I hope this does not happen and the real history of our struggles through civilizations is not ignored and censored. Penny Wong, a practicing Christian who by her words attends Church on a regular basis, has been a big supporter of the Internet filter. I hope she does not tell lies about our history as she has done about Same-Sex Marriage.
Hi Tom. Aboriginals still face lots of general discrimination in Australia. It is going to take a very long time to eradicate it. But in the meantime, at least all the LAWS that discriminate them have been ammended for them not to be legislated as 2nd class citizens.
We need the same for all Same-Gender-Attracted people – as an urgent & long overdue step, to ammend all laws (including access to Civil Marriage in a government registry office), that currently legislate us as 2nd class citizens with LESS CHOICE, against the tide of international reform & standards.
Same-Gender-Attracted people have been getting married all the time long before homophobia was invented 2,000 years ago- despite the church trying to delete records of same gender weddings, much information still survives.
So, prior to 2,000 marriage was a civil function, and luckily in most countries such as Australia, marriage has been a civil function for hundreds of years.
Once we gain access to Civil Marriage- in one fell swoop that will eradicate all government-endorsed discrimination, for those who are in a relationship & want to get married, and those who are single who want that as part of thier future.
The Pain In Ms Wongs eyes said it all, there is much too be achieved in fighting discrimination in Australia ahead of a fight to join a hetrosexual form of relationship recognition that has clearly failed.This young woman has achieved her high office using her intelect against all odds, race discrimination and homophobia.I would love it if she could use some supernatural power and lift the weight of injustice from this old poofs shoulders,but it doesn’t work that way.I was inspire by her couragous presentation on Q and A.This young woman deserves our respect and understanding I feel safer in a country where she has taken the time and efort to achieve her dreams, than any comfort offered by the screamig Queens that have no vision beyond copying a failed Hetrosexual form of commitment.And yes I have found the Labor party’s 80 odd bits of legislation have just added to the injustices my partner and I face as ageing homosexuals.It’s Time we looked for better leadership and promoted the fine work I see being performed by my fellow homosexuals in many of the areas of service provision that require compassion humour and dedication.Pride is more than a rainbow
Yesterday I visited the office of my local MP, and conveyed to the electoral officer that:
a) Senator Wong has a mandate as Minister for Climate Change, which I as a (fomer?)Labot voter can say is not being tackled seriously. She has not mandate as Minister for Gay weddings. She should have kept her mouth shut.
b) As a politician, both her and PM Gillard can and do all the time the simple act of ” deflecting questions”. The fact that she chose not to do tthat, and even justified it repeteadly, is a serious matter.
c) Specially insulting was to her that ” cultural and historical reasons” For god’s sake, she did really overstep the mark. This is not white australia anymore.
e) The ethical and moral issues here overstep the apparent choice of words.
f) wrote to your mps and senators. Convey to them that gay rights are human rights. that Portugal, Argentina, Spain, Canada, South Africa, etc did not think that historical and cultural excuses for discrimination on marriage was a valid reason to keeop the discrimmination. Neither did New Zealand and UK Labor.
g) we as a comunity are entitles to feel outraged. yes, we did expect the first female PM and a lesbian senator to be truthful to the struggle for equality and justice, as the sufragettes did.
h) they shoukld nto expect us to shut up or go away. We will not bow to a status of cast e of half- citizen with hal-rights in a hal-marriage scheme.
j) do not be fooled. Other countries have moved forward and had leaderhsip on the issue. Nothing here from the Labor party 2010.
Yesterday I visited the office of my local MP, and conveyed to the electorla officer thast:
a) Senator Wong has a mandate as Minister for Climate Change, which I as a (fomer?)Labot voter can say is not being tackled seriously. She has not mandate as Minister for Gay weddings
b) As a politician, both her and PM Gillard can and do all the time the simple act of ” deflecting questions”. The fact that she chose not to do tthat, and even justified it repeteadly, is a serious matter.
c) Specially insulting was to her that ” cultural and historical reasons” For god’s sake, she did really overstep the mark. This is not white australia anymore.
e) The ethcal and moral issues here overstep the apparent choice of words.
f) wrote to your mps and senators. Convey to them that gay rights are human rights. that Portugal, Argentina, Spain, Canada, South Africa, etc did not think that historical and cultural excuses for discrimination on marriage was a valid reason to keeop the discrimmination. Neither did New Zealand and UK Labor.
this attack on Penny Wong is an example of bad journalism fuelled by a personal dislike rather than biased journalism
I’m confused, Penny chooses to promote the view of the party – but then you have other Labor Senators such as Kate Lundy who are free to openly comment against other proposed policies such as being against Internet Censorsip –
eg news.com.au excerpt from recent Google debate – She said education would be a better strategy to make sure Australians stayed safe online, and cyber safety should be part of the general curriculum.
“It’s a personal view, and I hold the right within Caucus to argue the toss,” she said.
“But it is my business when she does not respect my right to not be discriminated”
That says it all- she is does not give us respect.
She is disrespecting us as legislated 2nd class citizens (with the 2004 marriage ban wrting extra & new discrimination into law against us), yet we are paying her salary with our 1st class taxes.
I don’t think the readers making puns on Penny Wong’s surname are intending it as racist, but I think it’s wise to avoid doing so as it distracts from the real issue here.
It is not racist for someone like myself David Tse, to play on a name. Other Australians do it all the time. I even have Wongs in my family but they are no relation to Penny. It is just that, a play on a name. Do not some Gay people call each other Girlfriend, Bear, Muscle Mary, on so on. Hey john you big girl.
I like Penny was born in Malaysia. I and others do not consider it offensive to play on a name.